Re: Is C++ used in life-critical systems?
"Ian Collins" <ian-news@hotmail.com>
I wonder who would ask for a crippled version of C++? Surely not
someone with an existing C++ code base, and surely not someone with
an existing C code base who wants to move to C++.
Why not? Depends on what is left out. You do not need many features in
the embedded world. You do not need your codebase written for
desktop/server stuff either.
That depends on your definition of embedded. My last embedded project
used Linux and was maintained by a team of 50.
Sure. :) I would not call that 'embedded' in *this* context, as in my head
it maps to something like the hosted/freestanding distinction in the C/C++
standard. We have cards and boxes that have a full PC built in, with OS --
to me writing stuff there is not very different to wrtite for similar
hardware that is installed in a midi-tower case. And stripping the
keyboard and monitor does not make a difference either.
The team size also have IMO little relevance ot embeddedness :) and it can
be natural that more effort is needed to cover features that otherwise are
supplied by the OS (or some stock library fitting the environment out of the
box).
I would not cry if there was no standard lib either -- if templates are
supported so I can import my own library or any stl portions I'd happen
to like.
Templates are another feature left out for "efficiency" reasons.
For me a teplate-stripped version is no longer C++. What then we have over
C99(*) really? Member functions? That is not such a big deal alone,
easily worked around with "python style".
(*) or its approximation called 'Gnu C', that is available in gcc --
supporting inline and variables mixed with code.